Jump to content

SpaceX Discussion Thread


Skylon

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, cubinator said:

I think it's most likely that Starlink is a test bed for a platform for Martian internet, and so is not as optimal for Earthly use atm.

No.

Starlink is supposed to be the cash cow that pays for the BFS and Mars colonies. If it wasn't optimized for Earth, then it wouldn't be much of a business model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, cubinator said:

I think it's most likely that Starlink is a test bed for a platform for Martian internet, and so is not as optimal for Earthly use atm.

Way overkill for Mars, on Mars you are likely to use geostationary orbit for communication, its no need for an highly celled structure. 
No its an way to make money as spacex can launch rockets pretty cheap. That they need is launch capacity so they can launch this then not launching for paying customers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, sh1pman said:

Ahem... Why do you need a high and powerful radio tower to broadcast a signal, but only a small antenna to receive it? Same with GPS. Your phone can receive a GPS signal, but in order to transmit anything back to satellite you're gonna need a much bigger antenna. Kinda like those on sat phones. 

 

Transmission depends on product of antenna efficiencies. You can also use a small omnidirectional transmitter antenna with low power and huge receiver antenna with sensitive detector, like small space probe sending data to DSN antenna on the Earth.

But there is severe bandwidth limitations in satellite telecommunication. Even optical frequencies could not handle telecommunications for medium sized city. Satellite telecommunications can never replace cable and optical fiber networks in large scale but it can be used in addition to them in remote areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hannu2 said:

Transmission depends on product of antenna efficiencies. You can also use a small omnidirectional transmitter antenna with low power and huge receiver antenna with sensitive detector, like small space probe sending data to DSN antenna on the Earth.

But there is severe bandwidth limitations in satellite telecommunication. Even optical frequencies could not handle telecommunications for medium sized city. Satellite telecommunications can never replace cable and optical fiber networks in large scale but it can be used in addition to them in remote areas.

This, bandwidth for wireless communication is limited, solution is cells. Bandwidth is still as limited but only inside the cell. 
This and to reduce spread of signal and light speed delay is why they go for low orbit.
it would still be limited to an large area as in hundreds of km"2 sharing the bandwidth. However in low population areas not to talk about the sea or unpopulated ones high speed bandwidth is already limited to satellites with far less capacity. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TheEpicSquared said:

Zuma has been delayed indefinitely, as far as I know.

 If it ever even existed. :ph34r:

Theres also This.  Next CRS has apparently been pushed back to the 8th, Irridium from Vandy on the 22nd still on track despite, ahem, “fairing issues” elsewhere. <_<

And we may just see Falcon  Heavy rise any day now... or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

 If it ever even existed. :ph34r:

Theres also This.  Next CRS has apparently been pushed back to the 8th, Irridium from Vandy on the 22nd still on track despite, ahem, “fairing issues” elsewhere. <_<

And we may just see Falcon  Heavy rise any day now... or not. 

I imagine that the fairing issue is about new generation fairings one way or another. Either recently manufactured fairings might have a materials flaw, or fairing additions to support recovery ops have some technical/material issue. As a result, any launch already on track with an older fairing is fine, and those with a new fairing need whatever has to be checked, checked.

I think that FH will be on the pad in the predicted timeframe before the end of the year for static tests if nothing else---and they want to do a number of those.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DAL59 said:

What does that mean? 

The TEL at LC-40 will retract at launch time, like it does at LC-39A, and not several minutes before launch, like at LC-4E (Vandenberg). Not only does it look way more dramatic and cool, but it's better from a safety and stability perspective since the TEL provides support for the rocket up until T-0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...